IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE & SPL. JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU.
CCH.33.
PRESENT:
SMT. B.S. JAYASHREE, LL.M.,
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE (NDPS),
BENGALURU.
DATED: THIS THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2022
Crl.Misc.No.7874/2022
Petitioner :
(accused No 3)
Sri.Deepak Samuel @ Guddul
S/o.Jayaram Samuel,
S/o.
Aged about 25 years,
R/at No.1344, near Ashwathkatte,
Ancheplya,
Kumbalagudu
Bengaluru­560060
(By Sri N.P., Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Basavanagudi PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in Cr.No.120/2022 of
2
Basavanagudi PS., registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.8(c) & 20(B) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
That the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the alleged
offences and have got valid and tenable defense. There is no
eye­witnesses to say that the accused was in actual physical
possession of the ganja. The petitioner hails from respectable
family and has no bad antecedents or he is a previous convict.
The petitioner is in judicial custody since the date of his arrest
and he is no more required as the investigation is already
completed. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any
conditions imposed by this court in the event of grant of bail.
He is ready to offer surety for his due appearance before this
court. He has no bad antecedents. He is the sole bread earner
of his family. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has in all seized 7 Kgs., 500 grams of
ganja from the possession of the accused persons. The accused
3
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7874/2022
is found to be in possession of narcotic substance. A detailed
mahazar is drawn in the spot. Personal search is conducted.
The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall extend upto 10
years. There is a primafacie case available against the
petitioner.

He is an habitual drug dealer.

In the event of
grant of bail, he would abscond and may hamper the
investigation. Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of petitioner.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here
under:
1. Whether petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge him on
bail?
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
4
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ A report submitted by PSI, ., who is the
complainant in this case before the Basavanagudi PS.

The
contents of the report is as here under:­
On
20.7.2022
at
about
16.00
hours
when
the
complainant along with his staff were on patrolling duty in
search of the accused pertaining to various crimes and when
they were passing through APS college, VV Road, MD block, an
informant came and gave credible information about the drug
trafficking by an unknown person near the play ground,
Armugam circle, Basavanagudi, Bangalore. After receiving the
information he has informed to his superior officer obtained
permission and he along with panchas and staff went to the
spot at 4.15 pm., and apprehended the suspected accused.
On enquiry he has revealed his name and address.

During
personal search 1 Kg., 800 grams of ganja seized from accused
No.1.

Thereafter, a detailed seizure panchanama was drawn.

A detail report was prepared and submitted before SHO.
Basing on the report, a case in Cr.120/2022 is registered for
the offence punishable U/s.8(c), 20(b) of NDPS Act. Thereafter
5
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7874/2022
accused was arrested and produced before jurisdictional
Magistrate and remanded to judicial custody.
During further investigation in the voluntary statement
of accused No.1, he has revealed that he was selling ganja
along with A2 and A3. Basing on his statement accused No.2
and A3/present petitioner were arrested on 21.7.2022 and
from the conscious possession of accused No.2 and present
petitioner, 7 Kgs., 500 grams of ganja is seized.

8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that
he is planted in the case by the complainant police he is
unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not commercial
quantity. The mandatory provisions of Sec.41, 42, 50, 52 and
47 of the Act are not complied. He is permanent residents of
the address given in the cause title. In the event of grant of
bail he is ready to abide by the conditions which are being
imposed by this court.

9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioner has
committed heinous offence in all 9 Kgs., 300 grams of ganja
6
is seized from the petitioner and other accused. The offence
punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine.
There are prima­facie material available against them.

10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
20.7.2022 complainant has conducted raid and apprehended
accused No.1. On looking to the seizure panchanama the
drugs seized from accused No.1 is weighing 1 Kg., 800 grams
of ganja and on 21.7.2022 accused No.3 was arrested and 7
Kgs., 500 grams of ganja is seized.
small
and
psychotropic
Department
commercial
substance
of
Revenue
quantity
issued
by
As per specification of
of
narcotic
Ministry
Notification
drug
of
S.O.1055(E)
or
Finance
dated
19.10.2001 at Sl.No.55 the narcotic drug­ganja 1000 grams is
small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity.

In this
case the quantum of ganja seized is 9 Kgs. 300 grams of ganja
is an intermediate quantity. As per the decision of Hon’ble
Apex Court reported in 2018 11 SCC 488 Birbal Prasad Vs.,
State of Bihar wherein it is held that:
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7874/2022
7
Ss.37 and 20 – Bail – grant of – non commercial quantity –
quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is a
non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved in
any other case – in above circumstances, held, appellant
should be released on bail, pending trial – hence, directions
issued to release appellant on bail, on certain conditions.

The said case law aptly applies to the case on hand in holding
that the contraband seized in the case on hand is intermediate
quantity and it is not commercial quantity.

In the said
circumstances, as per the observations of Hon’ble Apex Court
the bail plea of accused to be considered.
11. Here in this case the drugs seized by the investigating
agency to the tune of 9 Kgs., 300 grams of ganja which is an
intermediate
quantity.

When
the
quantity
is
less
than
commercial quantity, rigors of Sec.37 of the NDPS Act will not
attract, and factors become similar to bail petitions under
regular statues normal, unless the prosecution points towards
exceptional circumstances.
12.

The major portion of investigation in the case is
concluded as the incriminatory article is already seized from
accused.

The offence alleged against the petitioner is not
8
punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
custodial
interrogation
is
not
warranted.

As
Further
per
the
information provided by the petitioner he is permanently
residing in the address shown in the cause title.

The
apprehension of the prosecution that he may abscond and may
protract the trial could be compensated by imposing stringent
conditions. In the result, I answer the point for consideration
in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2:­
In the result, I proceed to pass
following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/­ with two
sureties for the like sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioner shall give attendance before
the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e.,
preferably on first Monday of every month in
between 10.00 am., to 2.00 pm., till filing of
charge sheet or further orders whichever is
earlier.

2.

He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
court without prior permission.

9
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7874/2022
3.

He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.

4.

He
shall
co­operate
investigation.

5.

He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

6.

He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
photo ID proof of his sureties.

7.

He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioner would entail cancellation of bail.

with
I.O
for
[Dictated to the stenographer, directly on the computer, typed and
computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in
Open Court on this the 24th day of August 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.